❓WHAT HAPPENED: Attorneys for writer and fabulist E. Jean Carroll are asking the U.S. Supreme Court to reject an appeal filed by President Donald J. Trump that seeks to overturn a $5 million verdict in a civil case, where Trump was found liable for battery and defamation.
👤WHO WAS INVOLVED: E. Jean Carroll, her legal team, President Trump, and the Supreme Court.
📍WHEN & WHERE: Carroll’s Brief in Opposition was filed with the high court on Wednesday, January 14, 2026.
💬KEY QUOTE: “Petitioner now seeks to litigate these evidentiary issues yet again. But his petition suffers from a fatal defect: It does not challenge the Second Circuit’s alternative holding that petitioner failed to show that any error affected his substantial rights.” — Carroll’s Brief in Opposition
🎯IMPACT: Trump is currently requesting the Supreme Court review and overturn the $5 million defamation verdict, citing “indefensible evidentiary rulings” made by the district court.
Attorneys for writer and fabulist E. Jean Carroll are asking the U.S. Supreme Court to reject an appeal filed by President Donald J. Trump that seeks to overturn a $5 million verdict in a civil case, where Trump was found liable for battery and defamation. In a Brief in Opposition filed by Carroll‘s legal team on Wednesday, her attorneys contend that President Trump‘s request for review suffers from procedural flaws and lacks legal merit.
“Petitioner now seeks to litigate these evidentiary issues yet again. But his petition suffers from a fatal defect: It does not challenge the Second Circuit’s alternative holding that petitioner failed to show that any error affected his substantial rights,” Carroll’s filing states, continuing: “Thus, this Court would have no basis for disturbing the judgment below even if it were to answer all three questions presented in petitioner’s favor.”
“The problems don’t end there. Each of the questions presented suffers from additional serious vehicle problems. And none implicates a genuine circuit split,” the Brief in Opposition contends, adding: “As for the merits, the Second Circuit correctly held that the district court acted within its discretion in admitting the challenged evidence. Certiorari should be denied.”
In November last year, Trump’s attorneys filed a request for the Supreme Court to review and overturn the defamation verdict, arguing that the district court engaged in error by issuing a “‘series of indefensible evidentiary rulings,’ improperly admitting highly inflammatory propensity evidence against President Trump.”
The 2023 lawsuit saw a $5 million jury verdict that held him liable for sexually abusing and defaming the writer, but not liable for rape. Carroll, who claims to have been attacked by multiple men over several decades, accused President Trump of raping her nearly 30 years ago in a prestigious department store, in changing rooms that are usually locked and attended by staff. No eyewitness testimony, relevant surveillance footage, or forensic evidence was produced.
The President was ordered to pay Carroll $83 million in a second civil trial, a decision that Trump is also appealing. He has consistently denied the allegations.
Join Pulse+ to comment below, and receive exclusive e-mail analyses.
